It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Justice Department Improperly Funneling Settlement Funds to Leftist Groups

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 07:25 PM
Here is an article by Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch:

referring to a scandal which I suspect may have huge implications. I don't believe the scandal has fully broken yet. It is extremely worrying to see what's going on in the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ. I suspect the paper trail might lead to some shadowy organisations with which Obama has had connections in the past.(see Ulsterman's inside information)...and in any case evidences illegal support of far leftist groups by the admin. Could this be Obamagate? See also Judicial Watch's investigation of the New Black Panther lawsuit, which is also looking like a big scandal about to break.

Fitton's article:

In August, Byron York of The Washington Examiner exposed yet another scandal at the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ). Judicial Watch has followed up with a lawsuit.

Here’s a squib from York’s piece:

The Justice Department has found a new way to pursue civil rights lawsuits, using the powers of the Civil Rights Division not just to win compensation for victims of alleged discrimination but also to direct large sums of money to activist groups that are not discrimination victims and not connected to a particular suit.

In the past, when the Civil Rights Division filed suit against, say, a bank or a landlord, alleging discrimination in lending or rentals, the cases were often settled by the defendant paying a fine to the U.S. Treasury and agreeing to put aside a sum of money to compensate the alleged discrimination victims…

Now, Attorney General Eric Holder and Civil Rights Division chief Thomas Perez have a new plan. Any unspent money will not go back to the defendant but will instead go to a "qualified organization" approved by the Justice Department. And if there is not enough unspent money -- that will be determined by the Department -- then the defendant might be required to come up with more money to give to the "qualified organization."

York’s piece specifically mentions two specific cases: United States v. AIG Federal Savings Bank and Wilmington Finance and United States v. Sterling.

AIG was accused of allowing third party mortgage brokers to jack up mortgage fees on blacks, charging a higher fee than for white borrowers. AIG disputed the claims and there was no factual finding of any wrongdoing, York notes. Nonetheless, by consent decree, AIG agreed to pay $6.1 million to aggrieved victims of this never-proven crime and guaranteed that $1 million of these funds would be distributed to “qualified organization(s) to provide credit counseling, financial literacy, and other related educational programs targeted at African-American borrowers."

What organizations? Well that’s up to Eric Holder. And do we really want the corrupt Holder making these kinds of decisions?

In the Sterling lawsuit (filed in 2006), The DOJ accused a California landlord of discriminating against prospective Korean tenants, among other things. Again, the defendants said it never happened and there was never any factual finding of wrongdoing. Nonetheless, by consent decree, they agreed to pay $2.65 million to alleged victims. And if enough victims could not be located, the remaining funds would be distributed to “qualified organizations.”

The DOJ selected the California Housing Rights Center to receive a portion of the funds. (Doesn’t that sound like one of those ACORN spin-off groups I’ve been talking about recently?)

As soon as we learned of this new DOJ scandal, we launched an investigation into the matter, filing separate Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests with the DOJ on August 6 and August 31. The DOJ acknowledged receipt of both requests and was required to respond by September 14 and October 5 respectively. But to date, we’ve received nothing. And so, we filed a lawsuit on October 25. The list of documents we’re seeking is too long to include in this space. But click here to read our lawsuit for yourself.

End of quote.

edit on 12-11-2010 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)


log in